OK, as i have already discussed with ray, my wife has decided that she wants a digital camera for christmas, more then she wants a scanner. so, i have one question..
is it more important to get a camera with higher megapixal, or with a good optical zoom? i have been told to stay away from the digital zooms, and you can get better quality pics with the optical zoom. but one camera i am looking at only has 3.2 megapixal, and the other has a 4mp.. i have seen them as high as 5mp, but those are out of my price range. so, i guess here is what i am asking. what megapixal rating is considered to be 'good enough', and can i sacrifice a pixal rating, to get the better optical zoom.
the cameras i am looking at are a kodak, with 4mp, but only a 3x optical zoom for around $200.
the sony is only 3.2mp, but has a 10x optical zoom for $250.
which is the better choice? or does anyone have any other suggestions, or features i need to look for?
thanks.. bigjohn
John
Being a photog, I would go for the higher megapixel. This will give you a larger and higher quality print. Do you know what type of chip the Kodak has? (cmos or ccd)
Bigjohn,
Check out the Fuji 3100 I believe it is a 4mp with a 6X zoom.. a great camera at $299.00
good luck,
Lee
i am unsure of the chip type bray. is that important? is that something i need to be looking for? and is that exclusive to kodak cameras, or is it all digitals? i really am clueless here.
thanks kioman.. i will look at that model.. i am open for suggestions..
bigjohn
John
I'm just a bigger fan of the ccd chip. The cmos chip is actually older technology,and started showing up in some "pro' cameras about 8 years ago and really didnt look that good. I understand they have come a long way with it though. You would probably be fine with either.
Most (not all) "good" pro cameras have the ccd chip.
this is a very good review site.....
http://dpreview.com/
John
Which models are you looking at?
well, after doing some reading and listening, i have decided that i dont want anything under a 4mp. so , right now, the ones i am looking at are the-
Sony cybershot DSC-P73
Canon A85 power shot
Fuji S3100
Pentax Optio S40
thats my short list.. i am trying to keep it under $250. those all have the CCD chip you were referring to.
bigjohn
Hi bigjohn,
I haven't shopped for these in a while. I have a Canon digital elph that I bought about two years ago. It is only about 2.2 megapixel with a 3x optical zoom. I love that thing. The best part is that it is small enough to take anywhere, so I take a lot more pictures than if I had to have a bag (as opposed to a pocket) to haul the thing in. 5x7's still look pretty darn good to my eye.
It seems to me that bigger optical zooms give you a much bigger camera. It might not matter to you.
I really like the Canon; it's very solid and capable. Easy to use. Great software. I especially like that it comes with a cable that allows me to plug the camera straight into the RCA jacks of a TV. I know there are lots of other more elegant ways to move the data around, but if you don't have your computer or a card reader or something handy, it's great to show the pictures you just took in slideshow mode on a TV.
Good luck!
John
I just looked at all the ones you listed.
I think they all have some nice features. One feature that really jumped out at me was the focal length on the Fuji which is about 39-234 mm.
That really covers a bunch, from wide angle to telephoto. Because of that, the Fuji is a little bulky compared to the others.
One thing I liked about the Pentax is that it has some (not much) built in memory. I think it said 11meg. Which probably only about 2 or 3 photos worth.
That being said about those models, I have always liked Sony and Canon
camera products. Canon more than Sony.
One thing to look at is the kind of memory each one takes. Some of the memory cards or sticks can run up to $100.00.
From my BRIEF review of the cameras you listed, I really liked the Fuji, simply because of the lens coverage. I think any of them would be fine.
Hope this helps
I have used the Optio, and found it to be good for about 15~ pix. It did have the expansion slot for a card.
As Tom mentioned, it was small enough to carry everywhere with me...a great feature.....
BBIBH
15 pix at what resolution? I was figureing 3 to 5 pics at 2-4 megs each.
you know....I am not sure the resolution.....
I will check when I get home. I suspect it is 800ishx600ish......
An expansion card will allow greater storage, and they have been coming down in price lately. I think the camera had 11mb onboard storage.
I have a 3.2 MP camera with 6x optical zoom, i find that the pixels of my camera is more than enough for what i do, I dont print out huge prints and so i dont need a 10mp camera (would be nice tho!) I would go for the optical zoom for sure.
I have printed 8x10's that look fantastic so it really depends on what kind of stuff you'll be doing.
bigjohn, I've had a Sony DSC-P72 (3.2 megapixels and optical zoom) for a couple of years and we are very pleased with it.
It's been replaced by the DSC-P73
here and looks like its 4.1 mp now and much less than I paid for mine. A little googling might get you a pretty good deal. I ran across
this site last month and its pretty good for finding specific equipment, prices and etailer ratings. Wish I had found it years ago.
my wife just picked up tha cannon ps1 with 3.2 megapixles and 10 times zoom,she is very happy with it,she rather have the zoom than more pixles.it takes great pics and is easy to use.i think it was around 400 bucks(thats what she told me anyway)
ok, the resolution is 1024x768x24bit, and the camera will store 19 pictures.
BigJohn -
A site that I found useful was
Steve's Digicams. He has a lot of comparison shots that give a sense of the picture quality...at least as good as you can get on a computer.
I'm not sure how much the 'ease of use' factor plays with your wife, but it was important w/ mine. When I was in the market for a digital cam, I had to balance that up against the reviews and the comparison shots. I ended up going w/ the Kodak DX6440 (4 MegaPixel). I did a lot of comparisons between 4 and 5 MP shots and found that the Kodak seemed to keep up w/ the 5MPs that I was looking at. However, what really pushed me over the edge was the printer dock functionality. I just walk up, plop the camera on the top of the printer, and then hit print. Yes, many cameras can just plug into printers, but this is just that much simpler.
The photo quality w/ the printer, as well as the Canon printer that I use for larger prints, is truly amazing.
...just my two cents. There are probably other cameras that have more bells and whistles, but the people over at Kodak seem to have it right in the 'ease of use' and WAF area.
Happy Shopping
This is the camera that I will be getting, the
Panasonic DMC-FZ3. You will see links to user reviews, the website review, as well as sample pictures. It is only a 3mp camera but has a huge 12x optical zoom WITH image stabilization which is crucial if not using a tripod. This is also a fairly compact camera. If this doesn't interest you, then look at the other Panasonic FZ series cameras...even the older FZ10 (which is bulkier but a proven performer). Of course, the more megapixels, the higher the cost in this series.
check this site every day for deals across the net, u can find some amazing deals on very good cameras in ur price range....
Deals2Buy
just a quick update.. oh, and i wanted to thank all ya'll for the links and advice. it all came in very handy.
after hours of careful consideration, i went ahead and ordered the Canon A95 dig camera last night. it has 5MP, with 3x optical/4x digital zoom. with shannon going to do lots of cropping and enlarging pics to scrapbook, i figured picture clarity would be more important than zoom ability. i had to bump my "want to spend" figure a little bit. i was able to find the camera online for $290 bucks, so thats not bad considering i have seen it priced over $450 at local retailers.
once again, thanks for all the help. i will post some pics from the camera after christmas. i hope she likes it!!!
bigjohn
Thanks for the update John. Hope it all works out well for you. When Shannon gets going with those photos, be sure to share with us ('specially Jackson). You just MAY have noticed that WE LIKE PICS around here.
Sorry to throw water on everyone, but I've read (somewhere--I'm good with references this morning!) that the resolution (megapixels) is actually in a lot of cases less important than the size of the imaging unit (CCD or what have you). I wish I could remember where I read the article, but it was probably on arstechnica.com.
Well, without a doubt, the megapixel "race" is a little like the WPC race we deal with here... big numbers are impressive to those who aren't exactly sure what attributes to search out when buying a camera.
There are sensors that are lower noise than others, but I would say the biggest overlooked aspect of many cameras is the quality of the lens. When people simply compare, say, 4 megapixel cameras by that factor alone, they think a $299 camera is a better price than a $399 camera. A better price, yes, but not necessarily the best value.... and it's very
possible (and I did say "possible"; it's not a given) that the lessor cameras' manufacturer cut corners in some important ways.
I like Canons.... I'm sure she'll enjoy it. I recommend rechargeable
powerex batteries if it takes AAs, and an extra memory card is a nice touch....
That's probably what it was. Me, I want a Digital Rebel or better. Which is why I don't have a digital camera... Or more than one lens for my EOS Elan 7e!
In reply to:
Or more than one lens for my EOS Elan 7e!
this is one of the reasons i didnt want to spend a lot of money for a digital. i bought my wife a Canon Elan when she graduated with her masters 2 years ago. we have 5 lenses for it, filters, battery pack, flash, remote trigger, tripod, and case. all in all, i bet we have around $1500 bucks in that thing. dont get me wrong, we use it, i just didnt want to spend a GOBB of cash on another camera. i think the A95 digital will be a nice compliment to what we have now. plus, its features and pic modes are very similar to the elan, so it should be a quick learning process.
bigjohn
You can not go wrong with Canon. Both Canon and Nikon make the best optics...hence there dominance also in the film world. I believe your model has the Digit processor which is a great technology.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0209/02091601canontech.asp
I've owned Nikons, Canon, Olympus, Minolta and hands down I always get more in focus shots with the Canon. These are usually fast snowboard, mtn bike shots. One of the worst shots has been a Fuji for me. Stabalization has been poor. Sony's have too much RED push in there pictures. HP has been QC.
i was taking a few shots with a canon A80 this morning....the pics were very impressive , they had great contrast and very detailed...am sure the a95 will be much better
As long as we're talking about photos..................................
My niece Aubrey and my girlfriends 1 year old Lilly on Thanksgiving
And this is Eli
My mom says "your little brother"
I guess he does have my nose.
wooooooow.....gr8 pics...whats the cam bray
I am not a photography expert by any means, but I have been using digital cameras since my .8 megapixal Sony Mavica. So take my comments/opinions with that in mind.
Deciding on what camera to buy really depends on what you want to do with it. If all you want to do is use it for everyday picture taking and be able to print out regular sized pictures for a scrap book, then a 3mp - 4mp camera will be perfect.
How many megapixals to get really depends on what size pictures you want to print. There is no reason to get a 6+ mp camera if you will never print anything bigger than 8x10. I personally wouldn't get anything less than 4mp but the 3mp should be the bare minimun unless all you want to do is email and keep pics on your computer.
By all means the most important aspect of the zoom is the optical zoom. The digital zoom aspect is no where near as important as the optical.
Best Buys website has a quick little guide to digital cameras.
Guide to Photo Quality
Guide to Megapixals
Maybe do a web search on the above 2 topics to get a better description from a photography website.
I now own a 4mp Canon G2 and love it except for the fact that its too big to simply stick in your pocket.
I have had quite a few friends who have had the different versions of the Canon Elph and they loved them.
I personally would like to get the Sony Cyber-shot 5.0-Megapixel Digital Camera. Slim, compact and robust for something that can slip into my pocket. I just can't see spending another $500 on a camera when my G2 is still a great quality camera.
EDIT: Another consideration is what type of memery cards the camera uses. If you already have a digital camcorder, it may make sense to stay with a camera that uses the same memory cards. My Sony TV even has slots for the memory sticks so I can see my pictures on the TV screen. Too bad I have a Canon. Those memory cards won't fit. Sony is a little more proprietary with their memory cards.
Shag
In reply to:
Another consideration is what type of memery cards the camera uses.
I personally prefer cameras that take AA batteries over proprietary designs as well. Not only is it much easier/less expensive to buy rechargeable spares, if you're on vacation and need some in a pinch, any convenience store will do.
gnrajagopal
I took the shots with a "Fuji S2 Pro". It is a 6.1 megapixel camera made for Fuji by Nikon. Its my fun camera.
My work camera is a Phase One H20 on a Hasseblad ELD body. 22megapixel.
LOVED those photos, Brady.
Those two little girls are dolls!
Bray, thank you for sharing your art with us.
Mark, I hear what you're saying about batteries, but my experience has been absolutely great with the little rechargeable battery pack on my Canon. It holds a charge REALLY well (I've never had a problem needing more juice), it is extremely light weight, and it has saved me probably hundreds of dollars on batteries. I was skeptical before I bought it, but my experience has convinced me that it is a viable approach. Of course, you could mitigate some of that by getting a good-quality rechargeable AA setup as you suggest.
I'm not trying to argue, because I think the points you raise are completely accurate. I just wanted to share my perspective.
I guess from a professional standpoint, I never wanted to run out of juice on a location shoot. You can never have enough videotape, film (sic) or battery power, and flexibility is King.
I recommend the same thing to consumers, because for MOST of their cameras, a day in Disney World would cause real problems in battery power (and memory as well). I usually carry 3-5 sets of rechargeable AAs, but know that I'd have to be pretty far from a convenience store to not get back-up if needed in a pinch.
It's not a deal-breaker to me if a camera has a proprietary battery setup, but all other things being equal, I'd choose a model that took AAs if I had to choose.
Well spoke, as always Mark.
You've got a professional frame of reference - I just take snapshots.
Like I said, I think your approach has advantages, and I was somewhat surprised by my overall positive experience with that little square pack thingy.
When did Flexibility succeed Elvis?
through another website I read, I was pointed to a great explanation of current digital camera technology. It compares digital SLRs (the really expensive ones) to standard digital cameras. It uses Flash so it's all shiny and polished, but it still informs well.
A Tale of Two Cameras
i thought i would revive this thread too.
as ya'll know, i ended up buying my wife the Canon A95 digital camera for christmas. i want to thank all of ya'll for the advice and links provided.. they were all VERY helpful. i just wanted to post a few of the pics she has taken with the camera. once again, thanks.
this is my 5 month old, jackson. i think he was hungry?
and here, turning on the charm..
once she learns all of the cameras features, she can teach me how to use it. so, i might start posting more pics, just cause i can...
bigjohn
What a super cute and jolly looking little fellow.
Thanks for the pics bigjohn.
Love that smile! Love those ears, too! (If you could see a picture of me as a child, yes we had cameras back in those days, you'd understand that comment)